Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care • Hacker News Board

Re: Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care

#211

Post by BobaFloutist » Thu, May 28, 2026, 5:12 PM UTC

pibaker wrote: post #117

I am increasingly of the opinion that you can either be eligible to vote, or collect pension, but not both at the same time. By the time you start collecting pension, you have effectively ousted yourself from economic production. And unlike a 20yo still in college and not contributing to the economy yet, you don't have 50 more years of your life to worry about. This effectively means it is safe for you to support any…

I don't think it's a good idea to eliminate any class of people for the electorate.

But at the end of the day, the point is moot: if non-pensioners can get their shit together enough to enact such a policy, they can surely organize themselves to oppose any poor voting by the pensioners.

The real problem you're facing is that young people: 1. Don't universally agree with you, and so support the policies you're blaming pensioners for, and, 2. Don't vote in large enough numbers to actually make their voices heard.

If you can fix that, you don't need to worry about disenfranchising a vulnerable portion of the population, since you can easily outvote them anyway.

Re: Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care

#212

Post by turtlesdown11 » Thu, May 28, 2026, 6:05 PM UTC

matchbok3 wrote: post #210

turtlesdown11 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It... literally is? It.... literally isn't? the cost of computers are lower today (in today's dollars) than they were in the 1980s and 1990s? https://www.chicagotribune.com/2021/09/20/cost-of-a-computer...

Cellphones. Broadband. Airpods. TVs. Smartwatches. Obviously it's not about just computers. The point is we spend more on this stuff than we did in 1980. That is a fact.

Again, it's not a fact at all. Spend a few minutes doing basic research. All of this tech is cheaper today than it was in the 80s or 90s, cell phones in the 80s and 90s were thousands of dollars, internet was expensive, as were other electronics.

Items like smartphones are dramatically cheaper than the tech people bought in the 1990s. It replaced your home phone, video camera, answering machine, alarm clock, clock, etc. You are not correct at all, the things that have gone up in price are housing, education, health expenses, etc. Not electronics.

The point is that people are choosing to have fewer children, and it's absolutely not because of the cost of computers or cell phones.

Re: Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care

#213

Post by skeledrew » Fri, May 29, 2026, 2:40 PM UTC

spwa4 wrote: post #195

skeledrew wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elderly means old enough for certain classes of issues to pop up that makes continuing to work less feasible. There's only so much more years that can be added before their contributions become absolutely net negative. Unless we also find general medical solutions to freeze/reverse the issues.

You mean spend more money on the elderly? You seem to misunderstand the purpose of this whole exercise. I will point out that the tax increase being proposed here is, of course, ALSO extra money for the state that people are expected to pay in trade for elderly care that the state, of course, ALSO doesn't have the money to deliver when it's needed. In other words, it's demanding the general population pays for a serv…

And your solution is? The problem is many eldery are currently going without sufficient care. How do you address that?

Re: Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care

#214

Post by skeledrew » Fri, May 29, 2026, 6:51 PM UTC

flextheruler wrote: post #65

ahtihn wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many people can't afford to have kids Wrong. Poor people have 0 problems having kids. People can afford kids, they don't want to compromise on lifestyle.

Then why are birth rates falling across all income levels in all countries? Please take the time to research your position. "This perception, however, is false. In most human societies, poverty does not predict higher fertility, and well-to-do families often have the highest fertility. When families in America have more money, they tend to have more children. The stereotype of fertility being skewed towards low-incom…

Birth rates are falling all around because access (including knowledge about) to contraceptives has increased over the years. Here in Jamaica just a few decades ago it was a regular thing to see women in poverty with a bunch of kids, and we had a decent birth rate. Today our birth rate is way lower, but I'm pretty sure there's still a lot of sex happening among especially those considered poor. It seems contradictory, but while they don't mind having kids, they'd rather not.

Re: Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care

#215

Post by jnovek » Sat, May 30, 2026, 10:28 AM UTC

ghusto wrote: post #131

jnovek wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re making a value statement in a discussion about factual information. Regardless of whether you think avoiding children for economic reasons is good or bad, it’s the leading reason cited by people who choose to delay having children. Regardless of whether it’s perception or real, that is the problem the needs to be solved if you want people to have kids.

Does it matter that "it's the leading reason cited" if it's further questioning shows it not to be true? I've heard it many many times from many different people, and not once has it been the actual reason.

I prefer the results of studies to the anecdotes of some people you know.

Re: Germany news: Childfree adults to pay more for elder care

#216

Post by zrn900 » Tue, Jun 02, 2026, 9:40 PM UTC

bigballsbjorn wrote: post #169

zrn900 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they require a lot of "labor" from you Unpaid work. If that work were paid enough through tax incentives and state aid, people would have been having children. But it's not. If they have children, they will be working intensely at their day job in an economic environment that expects ever-increasing productivity from everyone, and then doing more work when they get home. Japan did that. People started collapsin…

why would it be paid? you get the value back through the social contract. monetary incentives for children are empirically proven to be very ineffective. so the ship will go down regardless. why not to punish the culprits out of spite?

> you get the value back through the social contract

That was in the earlier decades when there actually was a social contract. Now the entire society is a profit extraction machine that has people working until they drop.

> monetary incentives for children are empirically proven to be very ineffective

On the contrary. Monetary incentives made immigrant families raise numerous kids. The problem was that natives of Germany weren't doing it. Or, maybe very few from the very low income segments were doing it.